While researching for my opposition letter to the current Proposed Rulemaking I spent a lot of time look at both SB-23 and the Rulemaking that California DOJ conducted in 2000 in response to SB-23. As my office mates can attest, there was something fundamental about the law as it stands and the current DOJ rulemaking attempt that was bugging me.

Then one morning it hit me.

The law does not say “attachable” magazine. Let me explain.

First, SB-23’s core section reads

Quote:

12276.1. (a) (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

The definition of “detachable magazine” from the newly renumbered California Code of Regulations:

Quote:

5469. (a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool.

The entire effort of the recent Proposed (but not finalized or likely to be finalized) Rulemaking is trying to make the Penal Code read:

Quote:

12276.1. (a) (1) A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to
accept an attachable or detachable magazine and any one of the following:

Of course, the law doesn’t say that.

What that means for us is that a new type of magazine lock can be fashioned for AR style rifles, and likely other rifles as well. The characteristics of the magazine lock are that it can allow a magazine to be attached to the rifle without a tool, however, once the magazine is attached to the rifle, the lock may not allow the magazine to be removed without using a tool. A bullet tip is a tool.

I have a prototype of a bullet tip/tool magazine release that I expect to start selling – hopefully in February. For now I’m calling it the California Range Safe Mag Lock. The first prototypes are supposed to be in my hands in late January. I have a thread over in the Rifleman’s Forum that shows some of the CAD drawings - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=45322.

There are some important notes about attachable magazines. Using a Prince-50 without a spring isn’t good enough if you wish to have your gun lying around with evil features, an open magwell, and the Prince-50. The reason is that once the allen screw is loose, one could hold a magazine into the magazine well and make the rifle auto load. If you are using the Range Safe Mag Lock and you attach a magazine to a rifle so equipped, you are not going to be able to detach a magazine without using a tool because the spring loaded nature of the Range Safe Mag Lock will retain the attachable magazine in such a way that it is not a detachable magazine.

Another very important note is that you CAN NOT use a magazine with a capacity higher than 10 rounds with the Range Safe Mag Lock. You would illegally manufacture a semi automatic rifle with a fixed magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds which is prohibited by 12276.1 (a) (2). If you want to use your pre-ban large-capacity magazines, you will need to go with no evil features and one of the Monsterman Grip, SRB, or U-15.

Also, if you do outfit a rifle with this magazine lock, I would recommend transporting your rifle with an empty 10 round magazine in the magazine well so as to simplify your explanation of how the rifle complies with SB-23 should you encounter a LEO who isn’t fully up to speed on the finer details of all this.

The key way to think about magazine locks like this is to determine whether the following scenario would work for your design as the Range Safe Mag Lock would:

Quote:

Defense Attorney: Hands an open mag well offlist AR with evil features to firearms expert. “Is this a semi automatic centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and prohibited features?”
Firearms Expert: “I believe so.”
Defense Attorney: “Are you sure about that? Are you sure this rifle has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine?”
Firearms Expert: “Yes.”
Defense Attorney: “What is the definition of ‘detachable magazine’?”
Firearms Expert: “Any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool.”
Defense Attorney: Hands a 10 round magazine to the expert. “Please place this magazine into the rifle.” Firearms Expert clicks the magazine in. “Would you please remove the magazine from the rifle?”
Firearms Expert: Fiddles with the .224” hole. “I can’t seem to do that.”
Defense Attorney: “Then it doesn’t seem like this rifle has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine since the magazine you now have in that rifle isn’t detachable. Do you still believe that this rifle has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine?”
Firearms Expert: “No. It is now clear to me that this rifle can not accept a detachable magazine.”
Defense Attorney: “And doesn’t that mean that this rifle can have the prohibited features?”
Firearms Expert: “Yes.”

I’d like to thank a couple of folks who came before me on this. adamsreeftank and dbol took some lumps last summer when they first brought this up. They were right and I want to commend them for noticing this early. Also I want to point out Metroshot and his machinist who are making a simpler bullet tip magazine release.

I don’t recommend the Metroshot lock, however, as I’ve empirically seen that an average male can get the magazine to detach without a tool. We handed a U-15 equipped lower with the Metroshot lock on it around my office and one of our co-workers who is about 5’7” and has usual to slightly smaller hands and normal length fingernails could detach the magazine. The key difference between the Range Safe Mag Lock and the Metroshot lock is that the Range Safe has a shroud over the release itself in such a way that you can’t get anything other than a bullet or a tool in to detach the magazine.

What does it all mean?

You will soon have two very good choices of paths to build up your off list receiver. For those who want evil features, the bullet tip magazine release is very, very easy to use and is certainly safer when you have an FTE or FTF. The two down sides of this style of build is that you can not use large capacity magazines and the bullet tip does add some time to magazine changes. Its perfect for range or plinking however.

If you want to use large capacity magazines or need to be able to swap magazines in home defense for example, you’ll want to go evil featureless with one of the Monsterman Grip, SRB, or U-15 stock.

I will be pursuing approval for this from the DOJ. Once these begin selling, part of the sale price will go toward getting these approved. DOJ will not like these and I expect an uphill battle, but there are some parts of the Administrative Procedures Act that DOJ may not understand.

Go forth and enjoy your off list receiver. I’m not yet collecting the other off list receivers and haven’t come up with designs for them, but I expect that other inventive guys here can come up with tool or bullet tip magazine locks for AKs, FALs, and others. Just remember that the key is that the tool or bullet tip either needs to deny a new magazine being emplaced or lock in the newly inserted magazine in such a way that it can only be removed with a bullet tip or a tool.

-Gene

__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns FoundationDONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!

"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon

I have no idea what is says, I just want to be the first to post. Now I have to read it.

DAMN YOU!

__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation

Read it more closely, and I now have a question. If you were to design a ring in such a way that it held a bullet or bullet tip on it, would the ring be considered a tool? If so, could you use this with the Range Safe style mag lock and be legal, or is it required that you use a bullet to release the mag?

You can use a ring. A ring with a protrusion is a tool. The only thing that isn't a tool is some appendage attached to your body.

-Gene

__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns FoundationDONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!

"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon

Read it more closely, and I now have a question. If you were to design a ring in such a way that it held a bullet or bullet tip on it, would the ring be considered a tool? If so, could you use this with the Range Safe style mag lock and be legal, or is it required that you use a bullet to release the mag?

Ok, so the new proposed regulations say unless the magazine has been "permanently" attached, it is still detachable. Will your product defeat that in some way or if they pass this through and let us fight it in court are you still screwed along with Prince50?

Second question, why did this need to wait for 1/1/07? Just for drama?

__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation

Ok, so the new proposed regulations say unless the magazine has been "permanently" attached, it is still detachable. Will your product defeat that in some way or if they pass this through and let us fight it in court are you still screwed along with Prince50?

Second question, why did this need to wait for 1/1/07? Just for drama?

It certainly would have increased the chances of a list(read BAN). Personally I would rather have one of these on my range rifle and a prince-50 on my HD rifle than banned AWs that I have to register and carry locked. Besides, it would have really limited lower imports for at least a while.

__________________
I do not provide legal services or practice law (yet).

Ok, so the new proposed regulations say unless the magazine has been "permanently" attached, it is still detachable. Will your product defeat that in some way or if they pass this through and let us fight it in court are you still screwed along with Prince50?

It requires a tool to detach.

One thing that might be fuzzy is what if some DoJ stooge grows natural long fingernails and then trims one to fit thru the bullet tip hole? I think it would have to be natural, not the fake ones, but even then, that would be so artificial that I can't see it being a valid prosecution tactic.

Anyone who already employs the Prince-50 has a legal configuration that makes the new rulemaking an ex-post-facto law. My mag lock just expounds on that fact. Neither my kit nor the Prince-50 are detachable. DOJ would like them to be, but the English language happens to be between here and there.

Look closer at what I'm saying. Permanently is specifically excluded from the definition of "detachable magazine.: In fact, detachable magazine says "readily detachable," which happens to be the antonym of permanent.

BTW: Bill has more tomorrow, and I happily defer to him on his topics.

Also, there is more that we have cooked up... Its just not ready for prime time -- yet....

-Gene

__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns FoundationDONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!

"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon

Re-read my post, if they successfully change the regulations, that won't matter. If it isn't pop rivited or welded, it won't mean a darn thing.

I seriously doubt this thing would have made them want to list. Why? Because even if they listed, this thing would still be workable.

I guess I should just be happy and go to bed, I guess I was expecting some more. What about Evans?

__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation

__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation

I believe the Evans thing is more or less that the DOJ(read crazy Iggy) has stated a listed lower is not listed if it is modified so that it cannot accept a detachable mag. Thus, we could aquire say, a armalite ar-10 if it was so modified.

Gene's little device alone probably would not have triggered and DOJ action, but Bill has a few more surprises I think; all together they might have caused some action I suppose.

__________________
I do not provide legal services or practice law (yet).

Ten/Wes knows that he will be selling my magazine lock as fast as he can ship it

And: All, if Bill and I had let all of our surprises out of the bag at once during 2006 I think we would have crossed over that vague line that would have pushed DOJ to list certain weapons. As you'll see from Bill's posts in the near term, it probably would not have been ARs or AKs...

And yes, Evans has made certain lowers we all thought were banned by Roberti-Roos be "up in the air..."

-Gene

__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns FoundationDONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn on Twitter.Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization.
I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly!

"The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon

I will be pursuing approval for this from the DOJ. Once these begin selling, part of the sale price will go toward getting these approved. DOJ will not like these and I expect an uphill battle, but there are some parts of the Administrative Procedures Act that DOJ may not understand.
-Gene

As to fingernail as a tool: My finger or fingernail, the owner of the firearm, can NOT detach the magazine. I don't care about any other person, because I can't be charged for some one else's actions.
Happy New Year!
Builder

__________________
Big boy's toys; turning hydrocarbons into noise!
Liberals & children have a similar reaction of interpreting limits as confinement rather than safety.
It's a fine line between naive, ignorant, stupid, & idiot.
Tomorrow - the greatest labor saving device of today.
"Rapid adoption of large-scale societal change is a bad idea." - Howard JohnsonLife Member